On ambition and literature, both Latin and Greek

john abshire

Well-Known Member
Poetae per litteras hominibus magnam perpetuamque famam dare possunt; multi viri igitur, litteras de suis rebus scribi cupiunt. Trahimur omnes studio laudis et multi gloria ducuntur, quae aut in litteris Graecis aut Latinis inveniri potest. Qui, autem, videt multum fructum gloriae in versibus Latinis sed non in Graecis, nimium errat, quod litterae Graecae leguntur in omnibus fere gentibus, sed Latinae in finibus suis continentur.

Poets are able to give men great and lasting fame through (their) writings: Many men therefore want writings to be written about their affairs. We are all drawn by the zeal of praise and many are led by glory which can be found in either Greek literature or in Latin. However, he who sees much fruit of glory in the Latin verses but not in Greek, he errs exceedingly because Greek literature is read in almost all nations, but the Latin is contained in their territories.
Edits: in bold red
 
Last edited:

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
Poets are able to give men great and lasting fame through (their) letters:
Good, but something like "writings" might convey the meaning more clearly than "letters".
Many men therefore want to write letters about their affairs.
Look at the voice of scribi.
We are all drawn with zeal by praises
Check the case and number of laudis.
men are lead by glory
*led

Multi doesn't mean "men".
by glory which is either in Greek letters or is able to be found in Latin.
There is no est in the first part. Inveniri potest refers to both parts. "Can" would sound better than "is able to". Litteris could translate as "literature".
However, who sees many fruits of glory in the Latin verses but not in Greek, he errs too much,
Better: "he who... but not in the Greek, errs exceedingly"

You could also stay closer to the original by keeping multum fructum singular in translation.
is written
That is not what leguntur means.
Latins are enclosed in their territories.
What does Latinae refer to? Not Latin people.
 

john abshire

Well-Known Member
Good, but something like "writings" might convey the meaning more clearly than "letters".

Look at the voice of scribi.

Check the case and number of laudis.

*led

Multi doesn't mean "men".

There is no est in the first part. Inveniri potest refers to both parts. "Can" would sound better than "is able to". Litteris could translate as "literature".
Better: "he who... but not in the Greek, errs exceedingly"

You could also stay closer to the original by keeping multum fructum singular in translation.

That is not what leguntur means.

What does Latinae refer to? Not Latin people.
I edited the post in bold red.
Thanks
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member

john abshire

Well-Known Member
How did you arrive at that meaning?

What case, number and gender is Latinae?
I mistakenly thought ablative because it made the most sense, but the ending is wrong for that. My very first choice was nominative plural, and that was wrong. So, I am now left with genitive singular or dative singular. I can’t make any sense of the genitive here, so it must be dative, either to Latin, or from Latin. I chose from Latin, dative singular, but it still is fuzzy to me. “Held together from Latin.” ??
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
My very first choice was nominative plural, and that was wrong.
It is nominative plural, though the way you translated it was wrong.

Which gender is it?
 

MIB

Member
... it must be dative, either to Latin, or from Latin.
I may be mistaken, and don't want to distract from the main point, but I think you mean 'for' rather than 'from.'
From is (usually?) used with ablative (but as I'm sure you know, not every ablative).
 

john abshire

Well-Known Member
It is nominative plural, though the way you translated it was wrong.

Which gender is it?
I think I got it now. My mistake was in thinking that Latinae was a noun. When I realized that it is an adjective, then the sentence made sense. “Latin literature” is the subject of the second half of the sentence, not “Latins”. Thanks
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
That's right.
 
Top